#FactCheck -Truth Behind the Viral Snake Rain Video: AI-Generated, Not Real

Introduction

The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology recently released the IT Intermediary Guidelines 2023 Amendment for social media and online gaming. The notification is crucial when the Digital India Bill’s drafting is underway. There is no denying that this bill, part of a series of bills focused on amendments and adding new provisions, will significantly improve the dynamics of Cyberspace in India in terms of reporting, grievance redressal, accountability and protection of digital rights and duties.

What is the Amendment?

The amendment comes as a key feature of cyberspace as the bill introduces fact-checking, a crucial aspect of relating information on various platforms prevailing in cyberspace. Misformation and disinformation were seen rising significantly during the Covid-19 pandemic, and fact-checking was more important than ever. This has been taken into consideration by the policymakers and hence has been incorporated as part of the Intermediary guidelines. The key features of the guidelines are as follows –

• The phrase “online game,” which is now defined as “a game that is offered on the Internet and is accessible by a user through a computer resource or an intermediary,” has been added.
• A clause has been added that emphasises that if an online game poses a risk of harm to the user, intermediaries and complaint-handling systems must advise the user not to host, display, upload, modify, publish, transmit, store, update, or share any data related to that risky online game.
• A proviso to Rule 3(1)(f) has been added, which states that if an online gaming intermediary has provided users access to any legal online real money game, it must promptly notify its users of the change, within 24 hours.
• Sub-rules have been added to Rule 4 that focus on any legal online real money game and require large social media intermediaries to exercise further due diligence. In certain situations, online gaming intermediaries:

• Are required to display a demonstrable and obvious mark of verification of such online game by an online gaming self-regulatory organisation on such permitted online real money game
• Will not offer to finance themselves or allow financing to be provided by a third party.
• Verification of real money online gaming has been added to Rule 4-A.

• The Ministry may name as many self-regulatory organisations for online gaming as it deems necessary for confirming an online real-money game.
• Each online gaming self-regulatory body will prominently publish on its website/mobile application the procedure for filing complaints and the appropriate contact information.
• After reviewing an application, the self-regulatory authority may declare a real money online game to be a legal game if it is satisfied that:

• There is no wagering on the outcome of the game.
• Complies with the regulations governing the legal age at which a person can engage into a contract.
• The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 have a new rule 4-B (Applicability of certain obligations after an initial period) that states that the obligations of the rule under rules 3 and 4 will only apply to online games after a three-month period has passed.
• According to Rule 4-C (Obligations in Relation to Online Games Other Than Online Real Money Games), the Central Government may direct the intermediary to make necessary modifications without affecting the main idea if it deems it necessary in the interest of India’s sovereignty and integrity, the security of the State, or friendship with foreign States.
• Intermediaries, such as social media companies or internet service providers, will have to take action against such content identified by this unit or risk losing their “safe harbour” protections under Section 79 of the IT Act, which let intermediaries escape liability for what third parties post on their websites. This is problematic and unacceptable. Additionally, these notified revisions can circumvent the takedown order process described in Section 69A of the IT Act, 2000. They also violated the ruling in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015), which established precise rules for content banning.
• The government cannot decide if any material is “fake” or “false” without a right of appeal or the ability for judicial monitoring since the power to do so could be abused to thwart examination or investigation by media groups. Government takedown orders have been issued for critical remarks or opinions posted on social media sites; most of the platforms have to abide by them, and just a few, like Twitter, have challenged them in court.

Conclusion

The new rules briefly cover the aspects of fact-checking, content takedown by Govt, and the relevance and scope of sections 69A and 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000. Hence, it is pertinent that the intermediaries maintain compliance with rules to ensure that the regulations are sustainable and efficient for the future. Despite these rules, the responsibility of the netizens cannot be neglected, and hence active civic participation coupled with such efficient regulations will go a long way in safeguarding the Indian cyber ecosystem.

Introduction:

With the rapid advancement in technologies, vehicles are also being transformed into moving data centre. There is an introduction of connectivity, driver assistance systems, advanced software systems, automated systems and other modern technologies are being deployed to make the experience of users more advanced and joyful. Software plays an important role in the overall functionality and convenience of the vehicle. For example, Advanced technologies like keyless entry and voice assistance, censor cameras and communication technologies are being incorporated into modern vehicles. Addressing the cyber security concerns in the vehicles the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH) has proposed standard Cyber Security and Management Systems (CSMS) rules for specific categories of four-wheelers, including both passenger and commercial vehicles. The goal is to protect these vehicles and their functions against cyber-attacks or vulnerabilities. This move will aim to ensure standardized cybersecurity measures in the automotive industry. These proposed standards will put forth certain responsibilities on the vehicle manufacturers to implement suitable and proportional measures to secure dedicated environments and to take steps to ensure cyber security. 

The New Mandate

The new set of standards requires automobile manufacturers to install a new cybersecurity management system, which will be inclusive of protection against several cyberattacks on the vehicle’s autonomous driving functions, electronic control unit, connected functions, and infotainment systems. The proposed automotive industry standards aim to fortify vehicles against cyberattacks. These standards, expected to be notified by early next month, will apply to all M and N category vehicles. This includes passenger vehicles, goods carriers, and even tractors if they possess even a single electronic control unit. The need for enhanced cybersecurity in the automotive sector is palpable. Modern vehicles, equipped with advanced technologies, are highly prone to cyberattacks. The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways has thus taken a precautionary measure to safeguard all new-age commercial and private vehicles against cyber threats and vulnerabilities.

Cyber Security and Management Systems (CSMS)

The proposed standards by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH) clarify that CSMS refers to a systematic risk-based strategy that defines organisational procedures, roles, and governance to manage and mitigate risks connected with cyber threats to vehicles, eventually safeguarding them from cyberattacks. According to the draft regulations, all manufacturers will be required to install a cyber security management system in their vehicles and provide the government with a certificate of compliance at the time of vehicle type certification.

Electrical vehicle charging system

Electric vehicle charging stations could also be susceptible and prone to cyber threats and vulnerabilities, which significantly requires to have in place standards to prevent them. It is highlighted that the Indian Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-In), a designated authority to track and monitor cybersecurity incidents in India, had received reports of vulnerabilities in products and applications related to electric vehicle charging stations. Electric cars or vehicles becoming increasingly popular as the world shifts to green technology. EV owners may charge their cars at charging points in convenient spots. When you charge an EV at a charging station, data transfers between the car, the charging station, and the company that owns the device. This trail of data sharing and EV charging stations in many ways can be exploited by the bad actors. Some of the threats may include Malware, remote manipulation, and disturbing charging stations, social engineering attacks, compromised aftermarket devices etc.

Conclusion

Cyber security is necessary in view of the increased connectivity and use of software systems and other modern technologies in vehicles. As the automotive industry continues to adopt advanced technologies, it will become increasingly important that organizations take a proactive approach to ensure cybersecurity in the vehicles. A balanced approach between technology innovation and security measures will be instrumental in ensuring the cybersecurity aspect in the automotive industry. The recent proposed policy standard by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH) can be seen as a commendable step to make the automotive industry cyber-resilient and safe for everyone.

References:

• https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/india/road-transport-ministry-proposes-uniform-cyber-security-system-for-four-wheelers/articleshow/105187952.cms
• https://www.financialexpress.com/business/express-mobility-cybersecurity-in-the-autonomous-vehicle-the-next-frontier-in-mobility-3234055/
• https://www.gktoday.in/morth-proposes-uniform-cyber-security-standards-for-four-wheelers/
• https://cybersecurity.att.com/blogs/security-essentials/the-top-8-cybersecurity-threats-facing-the-automotive-industry-heading-into-2023

‍

Digital vulnerabilities like cyber-attacks and data breaches proliferate rapidly in the hyper-connected world that is created today. These vulnerabilities can compromise sensitive data like personal information, financial data, and intellectual property and can potentially threaten businesses of all sizes and in all sectors. Hence, it has become important to inform all stakeholders about any breach or attack to ensure they can be well-prepared for the consequences of such an incident.  

The non-reporting of reporting can result in heavy fines in many parts of the world. Data breaches caused by malicious acts are crimes and need proper investigation. Organisations may face significant penalties for failing to report the event. Failing to report data breach incidents can result in huge financial setbacks and legal complications. To understand why transparency is vital and understanding the regulatory framework that governs data breaches is the first step. 

The Current Indian Regulatory Framework on Data Breach Disclosure

A data breach essentially, is the unauthorised processing or accidental disclosure of personal data, which may occur through its acquisition, sharing, use, alteration, destruction, or loss of access. Such incidents can compromise the affected data’s confidentiality, integrity, or availability. In India, the Information Technology Act of 2000 and the Digital Personal Data Protection Act of 2023 are the primary legislation that tackles cybercrimes like data breaches. 

• Under the DPDP Act, neither materiality thresholds nor express timelines have been prescribed for the reporting requirement. Data Fiduciaries are required to report incidents of personal data breach, regardless of their sensitivity or impact on the Data Principal. 
• The IT (Indian Computer Emergency Response Team and Manner of Performing Functions and Duties) Rules, 2013, the IT (Reasonable Security Practices and Procedures and Sensitive Personal Data or Information) Rules, 2011, along with the Cyber Security Directions, under section 70B(6) of the IT Act, 2000, relating to information security practices, procedure, prevention, response and reporting of cyber incidents for Safe & Trusted Internet prescribed in 2022 impose mandatory notification requirements on service providers, intermediaries, data centres and corporate entities, upon the occurrence of certain cybersecurity incidents. 
• These laws and regulations obligate companies to report any breach and any incident to regulators such as the CERT-In and the Data Protection Board.

The Consequences of Non-Disclosure

A non-disclosure of a data breach has a manifold of consequences. They are as follows:

• Legal and financial penalties are the immediate consequence of a data breach in India. The DPDP Act prescribes a fine of up to Rs 250 Crore from the affected parties, along with suits of a civil nature and regulatory scrutiny. Non-compliance can also attract action from CERT-In, leading to more reputational damage.
• In the long term, failure to disclose data breaches can erode customer trust as they are less likely to engage with a brand that is deemed unreliable. Investor confidence may potentially waver due to concerns about governance and security, leading to stock price drops or reduced funding opportunities. Brand reputation can be significantly tarnished, and companies may struggle with retaining and attracting customers and employees. This can affect long-term profitability and growth.
• Companies such as BigBasket and Jio in 2020 and Haldiram in 2022 have suffered from data breaches recently. Poor transparency and delay in disclosures led to significant reputational damage, legal scrutiny, and regulatory actions for the companies.

Measures for Improvement: Building Corporate Reputation via Transparency

Transparency is critical when disclosing data breaches. It enhances trust and loyalty for a company when the priority is data privacy for stakeholders. Ensuring transparency mitigates backlash. It demonstrates a company’s willingness to cooperate with authorities. A farsighted approach instils confidence in all stakeholders in showcasing a company's resilience and commitment to governance. These measures can be further improved upon by:

• Offering actionable steps for companies to establish robust data breach policies, including regular audits, prompt notifications, and clear communication strategies. 
• Highlighting the importance of cooperation with regulatory bodies and how to ensure compliance with the DPDP Act and other relevant laws. 
• Sharing best public communications practices post-breach to manage reputational and legal risks.

Conclusion

Maintaining transparency when a data breach happens is more than a legal obligation. It is a good strategy to retain a corporate reputation. Companies can mitigate the potential risks (legal, financial and reputational) by informing stakeholders and cooperating with regulatory bodies proactively. In an era where digital vulnerabilities are ever-present, clear communication and compliance with data protection laws such as the DPDP Act build trust, enhance corporate governance, and secure long-term business success. Proactive measures, including audits, breach policies, and effective public communication, are critical in reinforcing resilience and fostering stakeholder confidence in the face of cyber threats.

References

• https://www.meity.gov.in/writereaddata/files/Digital%20Personal%20Data%20Protection%20Act%202023.pdf 
• https://www.cert-in.org.in/PDF/CERT-In_Directions_70B_28.04.2022.pdf 
• https://chawdamrunal.medium.com/the-dark-side-of-covering-up-data-breaches-why-transparency-is-crucial-fe9ed10aac27 
• https://www.dlapiperdataprotection.com/index.html?t=breach-notification&c=IN